Is it worth it to upgrade to Windows 7 from Vista with new hardware?

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

  1. Posts : 5,056
    Windows 7 x64 pro/ Windows 7 x86 Pro/ XP SP3 x86
       #11

    seavixen32 said:
    I agree with clearfire62 that you should get a higher WEI score than 5.9.

    On my computer the top score is 7.5, but the WEI is dragged down to 5.9 by a HDD rated at 5400 RPM.

    As yours is 7200 RPM, it should beat the score of 5.9 easily.
    With a mechanical hdd, max subscore achievable is 5.9. To push beyond that, you'll need an SSD or a RAID setup (maybe). In win7, MS changed WEI a bit so raw transfer speed is less important than handling large amounts of read/write requests with low latency.
      My Computer


  2. Posts : 2,164
    Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
       #12

    Vista had a top score of 5.9.
    this was my old setup,


    and the same setup with Windows 7


    And with my i7 Setup,


    Q6600 gets a 7.3 and the i7 gets a 7.5 and the i7 is much much faster than my Q6600.
    I wouldn't get hung up about the WEI.
      My Computer


  3. Posts : 761
    Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195
       #13

    If it works on vista, chances are it works on 7.

    And RAID can't push your WEI score above 5.9. I had a RAID 0 config before and messing with the WEI logs it deemed the performance justifiable enough for a 7.0+ (Read/Write), but nevertheless it's a 5.9.
      My Computer


  4. Posts : 7,730
    Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64-Bit
       #14

    Arkhi and Bill, thanks for the update on hard drive performance in terms of measuring a computer's WEI as it's something I wasn't aware of.

    If existing hard drives are the bottleneck throttling system performance I can see why people are switching to solid-state drives.
      My Computer


  5. Posts : 761
    Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195
       #15

    Hey seavixen32. No problem :) Existing Hard Drives aren't really much of a bottle neck as long as you got the right ones. Thing is, MS deemed that only SSDs are worthy enough of a score higher than 5.9. SSDs are just too expensive IMHO. I prefer a Hybrid Drive (which is what I have) since it has the best of both worlds.

    You can take a look of your HDD score at

    C:\Windows\Performance\WinSAT\DataStore\YYYY-DD-YY HH.MM.SS.MS Disk.Assessment (Recent).WinSAT.xml
    Note the values under WinSAT>Metrics>Disk Metrics. Be surprised.
      My Computer


  6. Posts : 2,606
    Windows 7 Pro X64 SP1
       #16

    clearfire62 said:
    64 Bit is means it is twice as fast as a 32 Bit computer(which most are).
    Is this a joke?
      My Computer


  7. Posts : 7,730
    Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64-Bit
       #17

    arkhi said:
    Hey seavixen32. No problem :) Existing Hard Drives aren't really much of a bottle neck as long as you got the right ones. Thing is, MS deemed that only SSDs are worthy enough of a score higher than 5.9. SSDs are just too expensive IMHO. I prefer a Hybrid Drive (which is what I have) since it has the best of both worlds.

    You can take a look of your HDD score at

    C:\Windows\Performance\WinSAT\DataStore\YYYY-DD-YY HH.MM.SS.MS Disk.Assessment (Recent).WinSAT.xml
    Note the values under WinSAT>Metrics>Disk Metrics. Be surprised.
    I had a look and you're quite right. My highest responsive score came out at 7.8 so perhaps my hard drive is pretty good after all.

    I take it that this log is only written each time the WEI is run?

    Anyway, I've made a note of the file path you gave me - thanks again.
      My Computer


  8. Posts : 34
    Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit
    Thread Starter
       #18

    I found this article that does some benchmarks.
    It looks like they are pretty much the same but with Vista perfroming at the CPU minisculely better, and the Win7 performing at the VGA minisculely better.

    It doesn't look like there's a reason for the 5.9 vs 7.9 difference. I did some research and those are the upper limits of the Windows Experience Index rating. It's prolly just some Microsoft marketing thing where they add in 2 points or whatever for "subjective user experience" with the new product. I bet Windows 8 cap will be like 9.9 or something...then 11.9...or they will come out with a completely difference useless rating.

    http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/28...son/index.html
      My Computer


  9. Posts : 761
    Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195
       #19

    rasmasyean said:
    I found this article that does some benchmarks.
    It looks like they are pretty much the same but with Vista perfroming at the CPU minisculely better, and the Win7 performing at the VGA minisculely better.

    It doesn't look like there's a reason for the 5.9 vs 7.9 difference. I did some research and those are the upper limits of the Windows Experience Index rating. It's prolly just some Microsoft marketing thing where they add in 2 points or whatever for "subjective user experience" with the new product. I bet Windows 8 cap will be like 9.9 or something...then 11.9...or they will come out with a completely difference useless rating.

    http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/28...son/index.html
    Not really. See, when Vista came out, the fastest were dual-cores. They scored 5.9. It's unfair to rate today's Quad or 6-core with 5.9 still, hence the addition of 2 points. They planned to just scale it back, but that would just cause too much confusion.
      My Computer


  10. Posts : 554
    Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1
       #20

    5.9 is the highest possible score on Vista, and I believe 7.9 is the highest score possible on 7. If you see 5.9 on Vista and say 7.2 on 7, that doesn't mean it's performing better in 7, it's just the limitations of the WEI in Vista. Think back to late 2006 when Vista RTM'd. Achieving 5.9's across the board back then was virtually unheard of.
      My Computer


 
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

  Related Discussions
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:37.
Find Us